slngsht

 

you just joined to post that?

:yesnod: :smash:

 

Typical Mazda. Never missing an opportunity to up his post count :jester:

 

-John

CORVETTES ARE RUBBISH AND CANT TURN

 

:reddevil:

:rofl:

well, pulled the manifold off... no sign of anything bad.

started leak down test on the heads... #6 is the culprit. I guess it's off with the heads. It's really tempting to take both heads off, rebuild, do cam, chain, etc... On the other hand, I can just throw the gasket on (assuming the head looks decent) and keep on trucking... things look pretty clean for a 200+K truck.

heh, glad we haven't had to deal with most of that here

Mazda, did you tow your 7 with the Buick?

If so did you use a trailer or flat trailer it?

Transmission problems?

Used our Honda minivan with it... not something I really wanted to do, but did it in a pinch.

The minivan had plenty of power, but I'm sure the tranny was not made for that kind of duty (my seven is 1800 lbs, and my trailer is probably 1600 lbs - minivan tow capacity is 2000 lbs.). She did fine, but no point in pushing my luck.

Yep, my 1996 Tahoe had the alternator and waterpump go out ( under warranty) and the transmission blew it's guts while towing the Ultralite in my 16' enclosed trailer,( not under warranty) but I bought another Tahoe anyway. I have had 6 Suburbans& Tahoes over the years, and they have been good trucks.

 

You forgot to mention the front rotors warping. Note to all. Do NOT replace with AutoZone rotors. Buy name brand rotors ans solve the problem the first time.

Goes without saying :lol:

Since I sold my Buick, the vette had become my daily driver. With winter coming, I was looking for a beat up pickup or SUV for snow / salty road days, as well as occasional towing duty for the seven.

In my price range, I narrowed it down to old (mid to late 90s) Silverade / Tahoe / Yukon, or old Tacoma / 4Runner.

After a bunch of reading, I came to the conclusion that both have their faults (GM = some tranny failures, alternator, waterpump, leaky intake - Toyota = blown head gaskets, rust problems, under powered) and decided to stick with my trusty GMs.

As luck would have it, my brother was thinking about dumping his '99 Yukon... It has an apparent blown head gasket, but is otherwise in very decent shape. The truck has 203,000 miles on it - almost all highway, as he used this to commute several times a week between VA Beach and Maryland.

I'm getting her home tomorrow, and hope to take a crack at replacing the head gasket in the next couple of weeks, and getting her back on the road.

As a friend of mine said many years ago:

 

“Thank god we don’t get all the government we pay for”.

 

If we would just receive 50% of what we paid for, we could reduce all taxes by 50 %. Look at what the hogs are doing with the bail out $$$. They are still buying votes and blowing our money with it. I as well as most Americans was against this pork loaded pile of cash handed out to the same thieves who were responsible for the mess. My thoughts extend down to state and local government as well. If government, were as responsible as most small business owners we wouldn’t be in this mess.

 

We need more like Arizona’s Sheriff Joe Aparo in government.

 

Gary

Don't EVEN get me started on the bailout :rofl:

Good Morning,

 

Man it is dark now in the morning..... this time change deal is for the birds.

 

I'm afraid that my previous remarks weren't taken at face value. Some good folks have pointed out the obvious that certain things, like schools, are paid for with local taxes. I think most of us know this and if you read my previous post you notice that no where did I single out federal tax or national government. I'm talking about taxes in general - local all the way to federal taxes. Taxes in general. All the politicians I know of from the guy running for the local school board to the presidential candidates are telling us the same thing....... we can have it all and we/you shouldn't have to pay for it. Sounds like entitlement to me. My point, if weakly made, was that we want our government(s) to provide certain services and yet the representatives of those governments all tell us we shouldn't have to pay. My basic understanding of economics and checkbook balancing tells me that this doesn't ad up.

 

We have a very local issue here in Bozeman MT. Bozeman is growing very quickly and our infrastructure isn't keeping up. We have a serious lack of jail cells. There are many folks that are being sent home after repeat offenses because the jails are over crowded and the local public is very upset. Yet, time after time, "we" have voted to not pay more taxes that would allow for a bigger jail to deal with serious criminals. So we have more and more repeat offenses and higher crime rates and the public is outraged. "Someone" should have to pay for it but it shouldn't be me! A "not in my backyard" kind of thing.

 

I know Bozeman isn't alone with this type of thing and that it's going on in lots of places yet we the public sit placidly in front of the TV and nod with approval every time we are told that it shouldn't be us that has to pay. I feel this will be an issue until we voters as a group mature enough to look at the big picture and realize that it is "our" problem and that we all have to pay for these things that we feel are valuable. Whether it well paid teachers or properly cared for Vets all that money comes from taxes that we need to pay.

 

I know I'm not telling anyone anything that they don't already know. I just wanted to let folks know that I'm not as ignorant that some might think I am.

 

Enjoy the rest of your weekend and please exercise your right to vote and do so with full and deep thought.

 

All the best,

 

Dave

Dave, believe me, the word "ignorant", did not EVEN REMOTELY enter my mind.

I took the context as "federal taxes" because we were talking about national elections. I agree that even on the local level, tax issues are a touchy issue. My position on that is that government does not put as much effort in running more efficiently, as it does in trying to get more revenue. But at least with local government, I feel more empowered to do something - heck, even run for office.

I favor LESS Federal government control, MORE local government control. Even if in the end, overall $$$ are the same.

To give you an example of the efficiency problem, our local school district pays $1000 for each desktop computer! My jaw dropped when I heard that. Do you know how I know? because there weren't enough computers in the school, and the PTA raised 20K to buy 20 computers (had to be purchased through the county contract). Now, just picture this: How likely are you to buy a computer from a store at $1000, when you can go online and buy the SAME EXACT THING for $600? Would you not be pissed if someone in your family came happily home with a $1000 receipt for a $600 computer? That's how my local government operates... and they ALWAYS ask for more money. THAT gets under my skin. To that end, that was McCain's point about the way fed contracts are done. Spending less does not always equal getting less. I spent a few years working on federal contracts. The main reason I got out is that all the waste really pissed me off.

Thanks Gary and Bruce. It was a fun season.

 

Mazda, We missed you. As Gary said, Matt didn't make it so we've got all winter to figure out how to give him (and his Reynard) a run for his money.

 

Hopefully, we can talk a few more folks into joining the fun next season. It sure would be cool to show up with a bunch of 7s. :thumbs:

I know, I know

No mods for next season... I will just finish up what I have and RUN RUN RUN

hi!

 

i own a 1991 caterham super seven super sprint dedion, which i mostly run at track events.... engine is a crossflow, moderately to heavily breathed upon (176 flywheel hp at 7200 rpm). i instruct for many DE groups (PCA, BMWCCA, Ferrari, Mercedes, NASA, EMRA, and more). i road race with NASA and EMRA (not in the Seven!). i live near Newark, DE.

 

todd

Welcome aboard Todd, another 7 in Maryland :thumbs:

Mondo I agree. It seems to me that a flat fair tax would make things so much better. Then there is no doubt that everyone pays an amount that is compairable to their pay. Of course that is going to cause a whole lot of people to lose their job preparing taxes.

Either that, or make everything consumption based, not income / asset based.

Mondo, I agree with your major points:

1- pay as you go - force balanced budget at both the federal and state levels

2- proper financing on the war

at least we appear to be a rather civilized bunch. Some decent argumentation (I may not agree with everything) and no name calling.

 

Gert

:thumbs:

I've met alot of the posters, at least on the east coast, from both political sides, religious, or not. Believe me, it doesn't make me respect them any less. The fact that we can discuss this without degenerating into name calling, etc... is another testament to the quality of seven owners on the board :cheers:

I personally have no issue with the amount of tax that I pay and I'd willingly pay a good bit more IF the money was used properly and efficiently. I would love to see roads with wider shoulders so I could ride my bike without taking my life in my hands when the soccer mom in the Escalade buzzes by on her cell phone. I'd love to hear that school teachers are getting rich and that the pay was high enough to attract the best there is into the teaching profession. I'd love to know that the folk out there who need medical care who can't afford it wouldn't have to show up at the ER to get routine care and then not being able to pay the bill. And most of all I'd LOVE to hear that EVERY single military vet would have the very best medical (physical and mental) health care that money can buy and that they would be able to attend the best schools that money can buy when it comes time for them to rejoin civilian society.

 

How anyone could disagree with the basic premise above I don't know and the only way we can achieve these noble goals is to spend money raised by taxes. So whenever I hear that folks will get huge tax cuts all I hear is that the teacher will be underpaid and the Vet will continue to get shitty health care. So until the conversation switches over to how we can waste less tax money on crap all I hear is more "someone should pay for that and it shouldn't me" entitled it's all about me BS.

 

We ALL need to pay....... if that's socialism I'm cool with that. I think of it as money well spent as it's invested in our future and as a basic humanitarian obligation.

 

dave

Dave, As Jerry pointed out, almost all of those are local problems, and need to be funded and controlled locally. If people in Montana want, and are willing to pay extra wide roads, who am I to have a say in the issue?

Where I live, our local county school budget is 2.1 Billion dollars... or over 15,000 per student. WELL above the national average, and almost all of it based on county taxes. People in our county choose to make it a priority, and out of the 26 schools in our county, 6 are ranked in the national top 100 list. On the other hand, our hospitals are horrible. I think Maryland leads the nation in longest wait times in the ER waiting room. Again, locals get to make a choice of priorities.

The thing about taxes is that the more local it is, the more people will take ownership of the issue. If funding for everything can be realized by people in Washington, it becomes the free-for-all that we see... Grab as much as you can for the people who vote you in - if you don't, someone else will. It's human nature.

The federal government has several basic functions, including defense and interstate commerce issues. I submit that the way to balancing the budget is reducing the role of the federal government, and the federal taxes to go with it. Let the states and local governments raise taxes as needed to govern themselves. When the ownership of your issues are a local level, your voice will be heard loud and clear by your government.

So, the issue is not how much net taxes are paid... it's about accountability and ownership of the issues and challenges facing our country.

As for spreading the wealth (he did not say spreading your money)....over the last decades the wealth has been un-spreading or piling up tremendously on the very tip of the economy pyramid (did somebody say greedy?). Reversing this trend and that way "spreading the wealth" does not sound like a totally bad idea to me. Without a solid middle class this country is going to lose.

I don't know if what you say is true historically, maybe it is. Do the top 5% own a higher percentage of assets than they did in the 1800's, 1900's, etc?

The point is that it doesn't matter. What matters is whether there is opportunity for someone who is not rich to work hard, be smart, and make it there. THAT's what's becoming more difficult, and taxing people who are making 250K, 200K, or 150K (keeps dropping) at a higher rate, does not help that situation... nor does the current state of healthcare, etc...

All that aside, would anyone vote for a guy who said this, to defend the constitution?

QUOTE:

The the the victories and failures of the civil rights movement. And, it's litigation strategy in the court I think where succeeded was too. S formal rights. In. Previously, dispossessed people so that that I would now have the right to vote I would now be able to sit as lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I'd be Okay. But, the supreme court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth. And, certain more basic issues of political and and and economic justice in the society and, at the that extend as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren court. It wasn't that radical. It it didn't break free from the essential constraints were placed, by the founding fathers in the constitution at least the way it has been interpreted, and more important for visits in the same way that, generally the constitution is a charter of negative liberties, that is what the states can't do to you, says the federal government can't do to you but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.

I, for one, happen to like the constitution the way it is.

If raising taxes actually reduced the deficit, that'd be great. Actually it doesn't - not while spending is out of control. Furthermore, taxes are supposed to be a way for the .gov to meet its expenditure needs, not social engineering.

The above quote has some minor transcription flaws in it, because I ran it through a transcription engine. I'll be happy to post it up if you find it hard to believe a presidential candidate would actually say those words in that order. :nonod:

:lol:

I... must... not... pile... on :leaving:

Thanks Mazda, it works great. No more complaints from me!

 

Skip

Valid complaints are always welcome, and time allowing, I will do what I can to address them.

Thanks,

:cheers:

This is now the fastest forum I browse, well done!

This is why...

http://www.hostingspeeds.com/index.php?act=hcompanies&search=true&q=USA

top of the list... glitterhost.

All, we are now running on the new hosting server.

Please report problems here. You will have to re-login to the site. If you have problems logging in:

1- Clear your browser cache and cookies

2- Use the "forgot password" link

3- Contact me at mazda_ebrahimi@yahoo.com

If you're going to give him/her rides on a regular basis, I'd say go with the miata.

I started giving my older son rides in the seven when he turned... well... seven . He always wears a bike helmet in the car - mostly because the wind would bother him too much otherwise. I'm not sure if a bike helmet is actually safer for them, because even though it helps protect their heads, I'm sure the extra weight really strains their necks.

do you have a $ figure in mind? that might play a role in it. dry sumps aren't cheap

Mandurath, I periodically resize all the pics. Obviously not frequently enough. For some posts, a high res pic would be nice. I'll keep resizing.